 |
|
|
|
Next: Better AI pathfinding?
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Feb 24, 2006
Posts: 5
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 6:55 am
Post subject: Rules clarification: Convoy and support
Archived from groups: rec>games>diplomacy (more info?)
|
|
|
Hi everyone,
I'm hoping Nick and/or David and/or Eric and/or a host of others can educate
me here:
f bal c ber-pru
a ber - pru (or, for the judges, a ber - bal - pru)
a sil - ber
a pru s sil-ber
Does the convoyed army cut the support for the attack on its source
province?
Thanks for your enlightenment,
Andy |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: May 08, 2004
Posts: 397
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:57 am
Post subject: Re: Rules clarification: Convoy and support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Though the rulebook does leave something to be desired here (the terminology
makes things somewhat ambiguous--it could be improved, along with a bunch of
stuff), I think all the hand adjudicating GMs out there, and all the
adjudication programs, would rule that the support is not cut, and A Ber is
dislodged.
"Andy Tomlinson" <andy.tomlinson.DeleteThis@removethis.zg.t-com.hr> wrote in message
news:e08gmb$lbl$1@ss405.t-com.hr...
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm hoping Nick and/or David and/or Eric and/or a host of others can
> educate me here:
>
> f bal c ber-pru
> a ber - pru (or, for the judges, a ber - bal - pru)
> a sil - ber
> a pru s sil-ber
>
> Does the convoyed army cut the support for the attack on its source
> province?
>
> Thanks for your enlightenment,
> Andy
> |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 13, 2004
Posts: 45
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Rules clarification: Convoy and support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Andy Tomlinson wrote:
>I'm hoping Nick and/or David and/or Eric and/or a host of others can educate
>me here:
>
>f bal c ber-pru
>a ber - pru (or, for the judges, a ber - bal - pru)
>a sil - ber
>a pru s sil-ber
>
>Does the convoyed army cut the support for the attack on its source
>province?
I know at least one GM (Dr. John Boardman of "Graustark") who has
ruled in the past that "the attack is coming from Baltic, so the
support is cut", but I for one would rule that the attack is coming
from Berlin, so it does not cut the support of an attack into Berlin.
-- Don >> Stay informed about: Rules clarification: Convoy and support |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 04, 2004
Posts: 106
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Rules clarification: Convoy and support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Maybe the better question is why would one submit a goofy set of orders like
that!
"Don Del Grande" <del_grande_news DeleteThis @earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:n06h22dqahvvm4edbor6a9913549rl3g95@4ax.com...
> Andy Tomlinson wrote:
>
>>I'm hoping Nick and/or David and/or Eric and/or a host of others can
>>educate
>>me here:
>>
>>f bal c ber-pru
>>a ber - pru (or, for the judges, a ber - bal - pru)
>>a sil - ber
>>a pru s sil-ber
>>
>>Does the convoyed army cut the support for the attack on its source
>>province?
>
> I know at least one GM (Dr. John Boardman of "Graustark") who has
> ruled in the past that "the attack is coming from Baltic, so the
> support is cut", but I for one would rule that the attack is coming
> from Berlin, so it does not cut the support of an attack into Berlin.
>
> -- Don >> Stay informed about: Rules clarification: Convoy and support |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 24, 2006
Posts: 5
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:55 am
Post subject: Re: Rules clarification: Convoy and support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Thanks, all, for your responses. Interesting to learn that there's no widely
accepted resolution of this.
"adam silverman" <agman1010 RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> Maybe the better question is why would one submit a goofy set of orders
> like that!
Yes, given the situation as I outlined it, it does look goofy. But believe
me that, in the real game situation I'm currently facing, there are other
factors that make it worth considering.
Cheers,
Andy >> Stay informed about: Rules clarification: Convoy and support |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 08, 2004
Posts: 397
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:14 am
Post subject: Re: Rules clarification: Convoy and support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
An agreed-upon disengagement gone bad, perhaps. What if Ber had no retreats
(uninvolved units in Kie and Mun), and it was annihilated?
"adam silverman" <agman1010.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e0a9kt$1uv$1@news.Stanford.EDU...
> Maybe the better question is why would one submit a goofy set of orders
> like that!
>
>
> "Don Del Grande" <del_grande_news.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:n06h22dqahvvm4edbor6a9913549rl3g95@4ax.com...
>> Andy Tomlinson wrote:
>>
>>>I'm hoping Nick and/or David and/or Eric and/or a host of others can
>>>educate
>>>me here:
>>>
>>>f bal c ber-pru
>>>a ber - pru (or, for the judges, a ber - bal - pru)
>>>a sil - ber
>>>a pru s sil-ber
>>>
>>>Does the convoyed army cut the support for the attack on its source
>>>province?
>>
>> I know at least one GM (Dr. John Boardman of "Graustark") who has
>> ruled in the past that "the attack is coming from Baltic, so the
>> support is cut", but I for one would rule that the attack is coming
>> from Berlin, so it does not cut the support of an attack into Berlin.
>>
>> -- Don
>
> >> Stay informed about: Rules clarification: Convoy and support |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 08, 2004
Posts: 397
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:16 am
Post subject: Re: Rules clarification: Convoy and support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Well I'd say, DPTG and Boardman notwithstanding, that dislodgment was the
majority ruling. And if it is an RL situation, why not get a ruling in
advance from your GM as to how the situation would be adjudicated?
"Andy Tomlinson" <andy.tomlinson DeleteThis @removethis.zg.t-com.hr> wrote in message
news:e0auv0$nrr$1@ss405.t-com.hr...
> Thanks, all, for your responses. Interesting to learn that there's no
> widely accepted resolution of this.
>
> "adam silverman" <agman1010 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe the better question is why would one submit a goofy set of orders
>> like that!
>
> Yes, given the situation as I outlined it, it does look goofy. But believe
> me that, in the real game situation I'm currently facing, there are other
> factors that make it worth considering.
>
> Cheers,
> Andy
> >> Stay informed about: Rules clarification: Convoy and support |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 24, 2006
Posts: 5
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:55 am
Post subject: Re: Rules clarification: Convoy and support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"David E. Cohen" <david_e_cohen.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Thanks, all, for your responses. Interesting to learn that there's no
>> widely accepted resolution of this.
>
> Well I'd say, DPTG and Boardman notwithstanding, that dislodgment was the
> majority ruling.
Point taken. As soon as I'd sent off that post, I realized "widely accepted"
wasn't the right phrase 
> And if it is an RL situation, why not get a ruling in advance from your GM
> as to how the situation would be adjudicated?
Ah, now there's a useful piece of advice from someone more experienced at
this game than I am. Thanks -- will do!
Andy >> Stay informed about: Rules clarification: Convoy and support |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | Support loop - Hi, I'm new to the game, and so is everyone else that I'm playing with. We are playing at work during lunch, and we have encountered a scenario that I can't seem to find an answer for. The moves in question are; Austria A Rum S Bul Austria A Bul S Rum..
Illegal move? - I had these units: F MAO F Spain(nc) I wanted to adjust their positions and issued these orders: F MAO-Spain(sc) F Spain(nc)-MAO The judge decreed that this was a bounce. No other units were involved. I know that a fleet on a particular coast is..
Will It Lead to Trouble!? Issue 4 Available NOW - Issue 4 of Will It Lead to Trouble!? hit the streets yesterday. Chock full of stuff, including Science Fiction, Super Hero's; lots of letters; music ; live reviews; Nostalgia and a NEW GAME - Fighting Talk - enter now........ PLUS DIPLOMACY, could this...
judge: master and player issue - Hi, I am game master and a player in a game. Today I changed the deadline and got back an email with several moves in it, see below. This is not so bad this move as I noticed France's moves but as I am Turkey they don't really matter at the moment...
Changing New Game: GM/player to GM - I am new to this GM business. I have volunteered to GM a game for a group of friends, but it's my first time through. I created a game using the commands listed below and find myself also a player, which I don't wish to be. Two questions: How do I... |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
